Oncological and reproductive outcomes for gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist combined with aromatase inhibitors or levonorgestrel-releasing intra-uterine system in women with endometrial cancer or atypical endometrial hyperplasia

Fertility-preserving treatment for stage IA endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The increasing use of fertility-preserving treatments in reproductive-aged patients with early-stage endometrial cancer necessitates robust evidence on the effectiveness of oral progestins and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the outcomes following these 2 primary progestin-based therapies in reproductive-aged patients with early-stage endometrial cancer.

DATA SOURCES

We conducted a systematic review of observational studies and randomized controlled trials following the Cochrane Handbook guidance. We conducted a literature search of 5 databases and 1 trial registry from inception of the study to April 16, 2024.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies reporting complete response within 1 year in reproductive-aged patients with clinical stage IA endometrioid cancer undergoing progestin therapy treatment were included. We used data from both observational and randomized controlled studies.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

The primary exposure assessed was the type of progestational treatment (oral progestins or LNG-IUD). The primary outcome was the pooled proportion of the best complete response (CR) within 1 year of primary progestational treatment. We performed a proportional meta-analysis to estimate the treatment response. Sensitivity analyses were performed by removing studies with extreme effect sizes or removing grade 2 tumors. The risk of bias was assessed in each study using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist.

RESULTS

Our analysis involved 754 reproductive-aged patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer, with 490 receiving oral progestin and 264 receiving levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device as their primary progestational treatment. The pooled proportion of the best complete response within 12 months of oral progestin and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device treatment were 66% (95% CI, 55-76) and 86% (95% CI, 69-95), respectively. After removing outlier studies, the pooled proportion was 66% (95% CI, 57-73) for the oral progestin group and 89% (95% CI, 75-96) for the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device group, showing reduced heterogeneity. Specifically, among studies including grade 1 tumors, the pooled proportions were 66% (95% CI, 54-77) for the oral progestin group and 83% (95% CI, 50-96) for the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device group. The pooled pregnancy rate was 58% (95% CI, 37-76) after oral progestin treatment and 44% (95% CI, 6-90) after levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device treatment.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of oral progestins and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device treatment within a 12-month timeframe for patients with early-stage endometrial cancer who desire to preserve fertility. These findings have the potential to assist in personalized treatment decision-making for patients.

Fertility-sparing re-treatment for endometrial cancer and atypical endometrial hyperplasia patients with progestin-resistance: a retrospective analysis of 61 cases

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the oncological and reproductive outcomes of fertility-preserving re-treatment in progestin-resistant endometrial carcinoma (EC) and atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH) women who desire to maintain their fertility.

METHODS

Our study included 61 progestin-resistant EC/AEH patients. These patients underwent treatment with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) solely or a combination of GnRHa with levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUD) or aromatase inhibitor (AI). Histological evaluations were performed every 3-4 months. Upon achieving complete remission (CR), we recommended maintenance treatments including LNG-IUD, cyclical oral contraceptives, or low-dose cyclic progestin until they began attempting conception. Regular follow-up was conducted for all patients. The chi-square method was utilized to compare oncological and fertility outcomes, while the Cox proportional hazards regression analysis helped identify risk factors for CR, recurrence, and pregnancy.

RESULTS

Overall, 55 (90.2%) patients achieved CR, including 90.9% of AEH patients and 89.7% of EC patients. The median re-treatment time was 6 months (ranging from 3 to 12 months). The CR rate for GnRHa alone, GnRHa + LNG-IUD and GnRHa + AI were 80.0%, 91.7% and 93.3%, respectively. After a median follow-up period of 36 months (ranging from 3 to 96 months), 19 women (34.5%) experienced recurrence, 40.0% in AEH and 31.4% in EC patients, with the median recurrence time of 23 months (ranging from 6 to 77 months). Among the patients who achieved CR, 39 expressed a desire to conceive, 20 (51.3%) became pregnant, 11 (28.2%) had successfully deliveries, 1 (5.1%) was still pregnant, while 8 (20.5%) suffered miscarriages.

CONCLUSION

GnRHa-based fertility-sparing treatment exhibited promising oncological and reproductive outcomes for progestin-resistant patients. Future larger multi-institutional studies are necessary to confirm these findings.

Clinicopathological characteristics and fertility preserving treatment of atypical polypoid adenomyoma

Objective

Atypical polypoid adenomyoma (APA) is a rare benign tumor frequently diagnosed in young women that may coexist with or progress to atypical endometrial hyperplasia (EAH) or endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (EEC). This study aimed to investigate which subset of patients with APA are prone to concurrent or subsequent EAH or EEC, evaluate the necessity of progestin treatment in patients with APA only after achieving a complete response (CR) through hysteroscopic lesion resection, and assess the impact of concurrent APA on the fertility-preserving treatment of EAH or EEC.

Methods

This retrospective single-center study analyzed 86 patients with APA treated at the Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University between January 2010 and October 2021. Patients with EAH or EEC only who underwent fertility-preserving treatment during the same period were matched in a 2:1 ratio with patients with concurrent APA and EAH or EEC. The clinicopathological characteristics, treatments, and prognosis were analyzed.

Results

The median patient age was 31 years (range 21-47 years). Among the 86 included patients, nine underwent total hysterectomy, 62 received conservative treatment, and the remaining 15 were lost to follow-up. A comparison of the 16 patients with APA only versus the 58 patients with APA and concurrent or subsequent EAH or EEC revealed that a homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) of > 2.2 (P = 0.047) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) concentration of < 1.2 mmol/L (P = 0.028) were independent risk factors for EAH or EEC in patients with APA. Among the 17 patients with APA only who received conservative treatment and achieved a CR after hysteroscopic lesion resection, 13 received hormone treatment for a median duration of 6.3 months. The median follow-up time for these 17 patients was 49.0 months, during which no recurrence of APA was observed, but six patients developed endometrial hyperplastic diseases. Regarding the impact of concurrent APA on fertility-preserving treatment for EAH or EEC, the median time to achieve a CR was 24.0 weeks (95% confidence interval [CI]: 23.0-40.4) in the APA group and 26.0 weeks (95% CI: 24.3-32.3) in the non-APA group (P = 0.424). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the outcomes of fertility-preserving treatment.

Conclusion

Patients with APA only may still develop endometrial hyperplastic diseases after complete resection of the lesion under hysteroscopy to achieve a CR, particularly those with a HOMA-IR of > 2.2 or HDL concentration of < 1.2 mmol/L. Concurrent APA did not affect the efficacy of fertility-preserving treatment in patients with EAH or EEC.

Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device therapy vs oral progestin treatment for reproductive-aged patients with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine outcomes of patients with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia treated with oral progestins or a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (IUD).

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review across 5 databases to examine outcomes of progestational treatment (oral progestins or levonorgestrel-releasing IUD) for patients with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia. The primary outcome was the best complete response rate within 12 months of primary progestational treatment. Sensitivity analyses were performed by removing studies with extreme effect sizes. Secondary outcomes included the pooled pregnancy rate.

RESULTS

We identified 21 eligible studies, including 824 premenopausal patients with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia, for our meta-analysis. Among these, 459 patients received oral progestin, and 365 patients received levonorgestrel-releasing IUD as a primary progestational treatment. The pooled best complete response proportion within 12 months was 82% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 69% to 91%) following oral progestin treatment and 95% (95% CI = 81% to 99%) following levonorgestrel-releasing IUD treatment. After removing outlier studies, the pooled proportion was 86% (95% CI = 75% to 92%) for the oral progestin group and 96% (95% CI = 91% to 99%) for the levonorgestrel-releasing IUD group, with reduced heterogeneity. The pooled pregnancy rate was 50% (95% CI = 35% to 65%) after oral progestin and 35% (95% CI = 23% to 49%) after levonorgestrel-releasing IUD treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis provides data on the effectiveness of oral progestins and levonorgestrel-releasing IUD treatment within 12 months of treatment among premenopausal patients with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia. Although based on small numbers, the rate of pregnancy after treatment is modest. These data may be beneficial for selecting progestational therapies that allow fertility preservation for patients with endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia.

Prediction of complete regression in fertility-sparing patients with endometrial cancer and apical hyperplasia: the GLOBAL model in a large Chinese cohort

BACKGROUND

Fertility preservation treatment is increasingly essential for patients with apical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH) and early endometrial cancer (EEC) worldwide. Complete regression (CR) is the main endpoint of this treatment. Accurately predicting CR and implementing appropriate interventions during treatment are crucial for these patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study involving 193 patients diagnosed with atypical AEH or EEC, enrolled from January 2012 to March 2022 at our center. We evaluated 24 clinical parameters as candidate predictors and employed LASSO regression to develop a prediction model for CR. Subsequently, a nomogram was constructed to predict CR after the treatment. We evaluated the performance of the nomogram using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve and decision curve analysis (DCA) to assess its predictive accuracy. Additionally, we employed cumulative curves to determine the CR rate among patients.

RESULTS

Out of the 193 patients, 173 achieved CR after undergoing fertility preservation treatment. We categorized features with similar properties and provided a list of formulas based on their coefficients. The final model, named GLOBAL (including basic information, characteristics, blood pressure, glucose metabolism, lipid metabolism, immunohistochemistry, histological type, and medication), comprised eight variables identified using LASSO regression. A nomogram incorporating these eight risk factors was developed to predict CR. The GLOBAL model exhibited an AUC of 0.907 (95% CI 0.828-0.969). Calibration plots demonstrated a favorable agreement between the predicted probability by the GLOBAL model and actual observations in the cohort. The cumulative curve analysis revealed varying cumulative CR rates among patients in the eight subgroups. Categorized analysis demonstrated significant diversity in the effects of the GLOBAL model on CR among patients with different total points (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

We have developed and validated a model that significantly enhances the predictive accuracy of CR in AEH and EEC patients seeking fertility preservation treatment.

Urine metabolomics for assessing fertility-sparing treatment efficacy in endometrial cancer: a non-invasive approach using ultra-performance liquid chromatography mass spectrometry

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to reveal the urine metabolic change of endometrial cancer (EC) patients during fertility-sparing treatment and establish non-invasive predictive models to identify patients with complete remission (CR).

METHOD

This study enrolled 20 EC patients prior to treatment (PT) and 22 patients with CR, aged 25-40 years. Eligibility criteria consisted of stage IA high-grade EC, lesions confined to endometrium, normal hepatic and renal function, normal urine test, no contraindication for fertility-sparing treatment and no prior therapy. Urine samples were analyzed using ultraperformance liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS), a technique chosen for its high sensitivity and resolution, allows for rapid, accurate identification and quantification of metabolites, providing a comprehensive metabolic profile and facilitating the discovery of potential biomarkers. Analytical techniques were employed to determine distinct metabolites and altered metabolic pathways. The statistical analyses were performed using univariate and multivariate analyses, logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves to discover and validate the potential biomarker models.

RESULTS

A total of 108 different urine metabolomes were identified between CR and PT groups. These metabolites were enriched in ascorbate and aldarate metabolism, one carbon pool by folate, and some amino acid metabolisms pathways. A panel consisting of Baicalin, 5beta-1,3,7 (11)-Eudesmatrien-8-one, Indolylacryloylglycine, Edulitine, and Physapubenolide were selected as biomarkers, which demonstrated the best predictive ability with the AUC values of 0.982/0.851 in training/10-fold-cross-validation group, achieving a sensitivity of 0.975 and specificity of 0.967, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The urine metabolic analysis revealed the metabolic changes in EC patients during the fertility-sparing treatment. The predictive biomarkers present great potential diagnostic value in fertility-sparing treatments for EC patients, offering a less invasive means of monitoring treatment efficacy. Further research should explore the mechanistic underpinnings of these metabolic changes and validate the biomarker panel in larger, diverse populations due to the small sample size and single-institution nature of our study.